#1091842 bookworm-pu: package gss/1.0.4-1+deb12u1 (request for feedback)

#1091842#5
Date:
2025-01-01 10:49:28 UTC
From:
To:
Hi!  I am trying to follow/learn the process to get something updated in
a stable point release.

[ Reason ]

Resolve FTBFS bug due to expiring Kerberos ticket in
tests/krb5context.tkt causing self-tests to error out:

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1076885

tests/krb5context.tkt:

  name:authtime  type:GENERALIZED_TIME  value:20040711155558Z
  name:endtime  type:GENERALIZED_TIME  value:20240711155558Z

[ Tests ]

A similar fix has been uploaded to unstable in 1.0.4-4 and migrated to
testing:

https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=gss
https://salsa.debian.org/debian/gss/-/pipelines/788603

[ Risks ]

On salsa the bookworm i386 build fails but I don't understand why: the
build log suggests datefudge is working because of the makefile out of
date warnings, but still the test self fail as if the current date is
still used.  Could this be a datefudge problem on i386 on bookworm
inside Salsa CI runners?  Is there a i386 porter/bookworm box available
for testing?  The same fix built fine on buildds though.

https://salsa.debian.org/debian/gss/-/pipelines/789791

[ Checklist ]

  [x] *all* changes are documented in the d/changelog
  [x] I reviewed all changes and I approve them
  [x] attach debdiff against the package in stable
  [x] the issue is verified as fixed in unstable

[ Changes ]

  * Use datefudge to fix time bomb.  Closes: #1076885.

/Simon

#1091842#12
Date:
2025-01-11 13:42:02 UTC
From:
To:
Please go ahead.

Thanks,

#1091842#19
Date:
2025-01-11 15:14:45 UTC
From:
To:
Thanks.  I have done the upload -- let's hope datefudge fix works on
all architectures.

/Simon

lör 2025-01-11 klockan 13:42 +0000 skrev Jonathan Wiltshire:

#1091842#24
Date:
2025-01-14 08:32:14 UTC
From:
To:
Hi

I uploaded 'gss', but I don't see it anywhere, shouldn't there be some
indication of this being built?

https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/gss
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=gss&suite=bookworm

See below for ftp-master upload output.  I got e-mail about
'gss_1.0.4-1+deb12u1_source.changes ACCEPTED into
proposed-updates->stable-new'.  The d/changelog uses
distribution=bookworm.  Is it the wrong upload queue?  I didn't find
anything I didn't do here:

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#upload-stable

Or is this expected, and the package is stuck pending in some manual
process somewhere?

2025-01-11 16:13:48,053 - dput[272776]: uploader.invoke_dput - Uploading gss using ftp to ftp-master (host: ftp.upload.debian.org; directory: /pub/UploadQueue/)
2025-01-11 16:13:48,054 - dput[272776]: hook.run_hook - running allowed-distribution: check whether a local profile permits uploads to the target distribution
2025-01-11 16:13:48,055 - dput[272776]: hook.run_hook - running protected-distribution: warn before uploading to distributions where a special policy applies
2025-01-11 16:13:48,056 - dput[272776]: hook.run_hook - running checksum: verify checksums before uploading
2025-01-11 16:13:48,057 - dput[272776]: hook.run_hook - running suite-mismatch: check the target distribution for common errors
2025-01-11 16:13:48,058 - dput[272776]: hook.run_hook - running gpg: check GnuPG signatures before the upload
2025-01-11 16:13:48,767 - dput[272776]: uploader.invoke_dput - Uploading gss_1.0.4-1+deb12u1.dsc
2025-01-11 16:13:49,417 - dput[272776]: uploader.invoke_dput - Uploading gss_1.0.4-1+deb12u1.debian.tar.xz
2025-01-11 16:13:50,114 - dput[272776]: uploader.invoke_dput - Uploading gss_1.0.4-1+deb12u1_amd64.buildinfo
2025-01-11 16:13:50,819 - dput[272776]: uploader.invoke_dput - Uploading gss_1.0.4-1+deb12u1_source.changes

/Simon

Simon Josefsson <simon@josefsson.org> writes:

#1091842#29
Date:
2025-01-14 09:50:45 UTC
From:
To:
That's expected. The package is in stable-new now, and once manually accepted by
a SRM, it will be in bookworm-proposed-updates.

gss        | 1.0.4-1         | stable          | source
gss        | 1.0.4-1+deb12u1 | stable-new      | source

Cheers,
Emilio

#1091842#34
Date:
2025-01-14 13:31:57 UTC
From:
To:
Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org> writes:

Thank you!  Is 'stable-new' built by buildd's?  Are build logs for
'bookworm-proposed-updates' available anywhere?

/Simon

#1091842#39
Date:
2025-01-14 17:59:48 UTC
From:
To:
[...]

No, proposed-updates is.

In exactly the same place as logs for all other suites.
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php has a "suite" dropdown,
where one can select "bookworm".

Regards,

Adam

#1091842#44
Date:
2025-01-14 17:53:59 UTC
From:
To:
tis 2025-01-14 klockan 17:59 +0000 skrev Adam D. Barratt:

Okay, thank you!  I will monitor it for any build failures eventually.

/Simon

#1091842#49
Date:
2025-01-15 11:19:49 UTC
From:
To:
package release.debian.org
tags 1091842 = bookworm pending
thanks

Hi,

The upload referenced by this bug report has been flagged for acceptance into the proposed-updates queue for Debian bookworm.

Thanks for your contribution!

Upload details
==============

Package: gss
Version: 1.0.4-1+deb12u1

Explanation: fix FTBFS caused by an expired Kerberos ticket

#1091842#54
Date:
2025-01-15 11:19:49 UTC
From:
To:
package release.debian.org
tags 1091842 = bookworm pending
thanks

Hi,

The upload referenced by this bug report has been flagged for acceptance into the proposed-updates queue for Debian bookworm.

Thanks for your contribution!

Upload details
==============

Package: gss
Version: 1.0.4-1+deb12u1

Explanation: fix FTBFS caused by an expired Kerberos ticket

#1091842#59
Date:
2025-01-15 14:03:37 UTC
From:
To:
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=gss&suite=bookworm

All available porter boxes are listed at https://db.debian.org/machines.cgi

Thanks,

#1091842#64
Date:
2025-01-15 13:59:13 UTC
From:
To:
Jonathan Wiltshire <jmw@debian.org> writes:

Sorry about that -- I will investigate.  It builds fine on all archs in
unstable, but I suspect that 'datefudge' has some issue in 'bookworm'.

Since the time bomb is in a self-test, perhaps an acceptable solution is
to disable it if I can't fix it, or at least relax the time check by
patching code instead of using 'datefudge'.

/Simon

#1091842#69
Date:
2025-01-15 14:34:01 UTC
From:
To:
Yes, if there's reasonable test coverage in general disabling broken ones
is fine by me.

#1091842#74
Date:
2025-02-08 16:50:48 UTC
From:
To:
Unfortunately the uploaded package still FTBFS on 32-bit architectures,
with the krb5context test being killed. See
https://buildd.debian.org/status/package.php?p=gss&suite=bookworm&a=armel,armhf,i386,mipsel

The armhf and i386 failures look suspiciously like #1064021, although
I'm not so sure about armel and mipsel.

Regards,

Adam

#1091842#79
Date:
2025-03-06 17:27:04 UTC
From:
To:
Quick ping on this - the window for getting a fix in to 12.10 closes
over the coming weekend.

Regards,

Adam

#1091842#84
Date:
2025-07-05 16:10:46 UTC
From:
To:
Ping?

We've already had to exclude the package from two point releases due to
the build falures.

Regards,

Adam

#1091842#89
Date:
2026-05-27 18:54:39 UTC
From:
To:
Re-ping. There's now only one point release left for bookworm.

Regards,

Adam